Dear Jayanth,

Please do not give such serious labels such as mentors and tutors so readily :-)

It devaluates the sacrosanctity of the term. Please do not take this as a criticism or reprimand B-)

Best regards,

RR

[quote="I_seek_the _truth"]Thanks for the reply Dear Rohiniji.

I also had a similar idea, but I wanted endorsement from more learned and experienced mentrs like you.

I hope to learn more about Jyothish under the tutelage of people like you.
 
My name BTW, is Jayanth.[/quote]

Hi Jayanth,

At the outset, I would request you not to use such phrases like 'that seems to ridicule the understanding of the various asterisms as given in standard jyothish texts', because what RRji has said is quite correct according to my humble knowledge. While we learn a subject, we will come across many things new (only for us) and we must pass comments after ascertaining several times the truth of such things. In fact the the asterism 'Abhijit' was included in the group of stars. It extends from 276- 40’ to 280- 54' overlapping the 27th Nakshetra (Uttarashada). It is also very true that it was omitted for convenience.

As for the observations that the present Panchangs are out dated, I would not agree. Because we should not confuse ourselves with the Sayana zodiac and the siderial zodiac. The costellations as viewed from earth are fixed (that is why we call the nirayana zodiac as 'fixed').

The earth's axis of rotation is inclined at an angle of 23 1/2° to the ecliptic. Owing to the gravitational pull exerted on the equatorial bulge by the luminaries and this inclination, the earth revolves like a spinning top, its pole describing  a great circle (the Precessional Arc) in space every 2600 years (a Great Year). The notation is irregular and hence the variations in the lengths of Great Years from 2300 to 2600 solar years.

The wobble causes shifting of the equinoxes backward in space. During a Great Year, earth's pole aligns with different pole stars. At present Polaris is the North-pole star. Because of the precession of the equinoxes, the Tropical zodaic also moves with respect to the constellations (stars), which remain fixed in space several light years away. So, the sign Aries of the Tropical zodiac, which commences at the vernal equinox, no more coincides with the asterism called Aswini where the Sidereal zodaic starts.  Moreover, the precessional movement is not uniform as we have said earlier. Much debate has been going on since the last century about the exact precession of the equinoxes. (at present the Tropical Aries coincides with 5° Sidereal Pisces.). The difference in longitude of the two zodiacs is termed the 'Ayanamsa' or Precession of the Equinoxes. By subtracting the ayanamsa from the sayana (observed) position  of planets, we get their nirayana (constellational) positions.

The  panchangs take into consideration not the moving zodaic (not at all related to the asterisms) but the fixed zodaic. If you are born in Mrigashira star, nobody can say wrong if at the time of your birth Moon was in that constellation!


All the best!

Thanks for the crystal clear explanation, Nechi.  


I didn't ridicule the asterisms. In fact having dabbled for quite sometime in Astrology, I have been in awe of some of its predictions. I was only clearing my doubts.

Your explanation abt the moving zodiac and the fixed one, is quite new for me. something i didn't know before.

as for sayana and nirayana systems I have long given up thinking of myself as Virgo based on the western systems...! I'm nothing if not  Aries asc, and makara moon. maybe leo sun, surely not Virgo...!

Dear Jayanth,

I have been studying astrology/jyotish/divination etc only for four decades or so, mostly jyotish during these years, therefore, I do not feel I am qualified or experienced enough to question sayana zodiac and many thousands of fine astrologers who utilize that zodiac as their reference. There is no black and white or definitive path or method even within jyotish as you must have seen (ayanamshas differ but yield good results in different hands, for starters).

Your reference to the tropical sun-sign is something that arises from what we read and hear on internet and elsewhere. Even mildly serious western astrologers that I know of use the ascendant oriented chart. On the other hand even jyotishis use sun-oriented charts. What do you think sudarshana horoscope is? It opens a whole slew of possibilities and should be something I will recommend you try.

Sayana zodiac is not unreal or imaginary! Actually it is even closer to earth than the nirayana zodiac! Because sayana is based on earth's rotation and is linked to the seasons, which are a geo-solar phenomenon as you know I am sure. It is unfortunate that early tropical astrologers used the term zodiac and that celestial reference is what causes confusion at times. But what is in a name, right? If they called aries, Spring I, taurus Spring II, and so on Summer I/II/III and Autumn I/II/III, they would not have needed to use the zodiacal names but would be using the same methods as they are now. I realize that when tropical astrology was first available in an organized form (Alexandria, Babylon etc) the two zodiacs were in sync so the traditional rulerships were utilized but pretty soon through intelligent observations and empirical approaches they needed to change the rulerships and use a different system of aspects and so on and in hands that know how to steer this different ship, things work very well, believe me. I have observed some very interesting performances from western astrological scholars in terms of timing and general traits and so on. Unfortunately we often rely on our impressions on tropical astrology from those who eventually moved to jyotish. However, there are many who have not moved to jyotish not out of some dig-in-with-your-heels mentality but because it is working well in their hands and they are contented. Surprised?

Using an analogy, if I wanted to know about success in high tech industry, would I go and find out the truth from someone who is still in high tech industry and successful or someone else who dabbled in high tech industry, could not cut it and now is an actor or math teacher or whatever. I hope you get my point. I am not trying to put down any profession or system or an individual and certainly not your thoughts that you shared with us, but just trying to share what I think about this whole issue that is way bigger than all of us put together. Let us not be hasty. Does that make sense?

Oh and Sayana/Nirayana and Movable/Fixed are interchangeable terms ;-)

Regards,

RR

[quote="I_seek_the _truth"]Thanks for the crystal clear explanation, Nechi.  


I didn't ridicule the asterisms. In fact having dabbled for quite sometime in Astrology, I have been in awe of some of its predictions. I was only clearing my doubts.

Your explanation abt the moving zodiac and the fixed one, is quite new for me. something i didn't know before.

as for sayana and nirayana systems I have long given up thinking of myself as Virgo based on the western systems...! I'm nothing if not  Aries asc, and makara moon. maybe leo sun, surely not Virgo...![/quote]

Jyothish, is a subject tht needs the guiding hand of someone who has "been there, done that", to be learnt effectively and correctly. In that way RRji, whatever you say, I will try and digest it, as much as I can. There is no reason for me to believe tht wht you say is to belittle me. I'm here to learn, and people like ou, if they so wish can guide the future generation in learning this little-understood and much-maligned science.

Returning to the res, yes , it was new to me tht the terms were interchangeable. And, thanks for explaining from your experience the validity of the tropical zodiacs. I was certainly colored by my experiences with the sunsign predictions.